Has my Architect been Negligent?

Joined
17 May 2013
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
Cheshire
Country
United Kingdom
Hi,

Long story short.
Instructed an ARB reg Architect March 2012 to design extensions and dormers to an existing bungalow, to increase from 143sqm to 368sqm (A,B,C,D,E)
Planning was approved for the scheme in July 2012.

August 2012 he produced Pre Construction details in the form of building reg drawings (details/sections/elevations etc..) coinciding with Tender/Technical drawings and tender docs (F,G,H)

November 2012 Building Regs approved.

Architects contract now ended as per original scope of works (A-H).

December 2012 an Architect recommended builder was contracted and commenced works on the 26 week scheme.

April 2012 Builder terminated his contract with us leaving the home 30% complete (uninhabitable, unsafe, defective etc..). Major issue for which we now hold the Ltd Co. Builder in repudiation due to his failure to complete the contract.

May 2012 Enforcement Officer slaps a Breach of Planning over the build due to wrongly built dormers, deviated spec side ext (wider than approved) and Fenestration level issues to the front facade.

It has since become very apparent upon closer inspection of the "T" drawings produced by the Architect that there are numerous variations/deviations from the LPA approved plans.
We are not talking minor amendments here, material amendments that will require a resubmission for planning approval due to the works completed to date where the builder has followed the Tender/Technical drawings which differ from the Planning approved ones.

An independent Planning Consultant, SE, Building Surveyor amongest other's have now noted and confirmed the PL drawings are different from the T drawings.
At no point did I instruct the Architect to deviate from the approved plans when he produced the T drawings other than 2 small minor amendable points which were confirmed. There are various Elevation variations which to the naked eye home owner do not stand out, but in theory result in 200-600mm variances across the whole scheme, be it dormers, roof lines, extensions etc...

As the original builder has now walked away, which was a major issue both financially and inconvenience, the new issue's that have arisen with the Architect are even more concerning.
The Architect has become quite awkward and has suggested I undertake an independent new full survey at my expense (£2,000) even though I had already paid the Architect to survey the site/scheme as part of the scope of works with him when the planning commenced.

I do have a meeting with him tomorrow afternoon at which point I am going to lay it all on the table regarding the PL & T drawing variations without my consent to alter.
IF, he still shirks responsibilty and is unwilling to admit fault do you think this is unreasonable practice. If so, what recourse from the Architect and his firm do you think I should look at taking.

From an originally £200k build it's now potentially blowing out to £300k +, with an added 26 weeks to the original 26 weeks due to down time and the potential resubmission of plans, new builder to complete etc...

Thanks for reading and appreciate any constructive replies, if you need more info without naming names please ask.
 
Sponsored Links
The Architect has become quite awkward and has suggested I undertake an independent new full survey at my expense
Which you have already done no.....?
An independent Planning Consultant, SE, Building Surveyor amongest other's have now noted and confirmed the PL drawings are different from the T drawings.
What's your beef with the builder and why has he walked?
 
Sponsored Links
The Architect has become quite awkward and has suggested I undertake an independent new full survey at my expense
Which you have already done no.....? No
An independent Planning Consultant, SE, Building Surveyor amongest other's have now noted and confirmed the PL drawings are different from the T drawings.
What's your beef with the builder and why has he walked?
Cowboy Builder in a nutshell, ran away with the subbies when he realised he couldnt do it and or within his fixed price contract. But anyway it's about the Architect right now.
 
I think I follow the sequence of events; architect designed a scheme for planning and then submitted a different scheme for building regs and construction. I'm struggling to see how that happened though because I would normally use the planning drawings as the base for the building regs drawings - in other words they are basically the same drawings with the details worked up. I think at the very least he needs to give you a clear explanation as to why this came about. What happens then depends on his response.

The only other thing I would add for now is that very occasionally it makes sense to not work out a lot of build detail at planning stage. Working out that detail can be costly and is wasted if the scheme is refused. But that's the skill of the designer - being able to anticipate what can be built and what the likely issues might be. Maybe your architect was a bit cavalier with the planning scheme and then found later he had to change things to make it buildable. If so he's a very silly boy.
 
I think I follow the sequence of events; architect designed a scheme for planning and then submitted a different scheme for building regs and construction. I'm struggling to see how that happened though because I would normally use the planning drawings as the base for the building regs drawings - in other words they are basically the same drawings with the details worked up. I think at the very least he needs to give you a clear explanation as to why this came about. What happens then depends on his response.

The only other thing I would add for now is that very occasionally it makes sense to not work out a lot of build detail at planning stage. Working out that detail can be costly and is wasted if the scheme is refused. But that's the skill of the designer - being able to anticipate what can be built and what the likely issues might be. Maybe your architect was a bit cavalier with the planning scheme and then found later he had to change things to make it buildable. If so he's a very silly boy.

Meeting with Architect to raise the points at 2pm today, I'll let you know the response. Cheers
 
Can some kind person post the bullet point version?
* Architect did one set of drawings for planning, different set of drawings for building regs & builder.
* Planners have served notices regarding material differences.

* And for good measure, the builder has p***ed off.

Sounds like the main problem is down to the architect. Time to claim off his PI insurance ?
 
Update:

Had meeting with Architect in their office and one of his partners was also present.

They both insisted they sent us the building reg/Tender plans after planning approval based on PL plans that it was our (clients) responsibility to notice any changes between the PL & t drawings! Since when is it the clients responsibilty to find FAULT in the Architects drawings!

Major argument's occurred on the basis that we suggested we never once gave permission for them to make "material" changes to the originally approved PL drawings. They kept insisting it was our fault for not spotting - ridiculous!!!

It was obvious they were not prepared to implicate themselves and would not admit fault. Instead of forcing the issue and making a claim against their PI with negligence, they did a u-turn and said we will re survey the property and now use the tender drawings to get new planning approval.

Not happy but we are stuck between a rock and hard place as we need to move on. Plus due to the original cowboy builder making material changes without consent we would have to put in a new application anyway.

If the Architect does not survey up the property this week and resubmit new plans based on their T drawings withing the next 7-10 days we will definitely raise a complaint to the ARB and their PI.

Once that matter is sorted I will have no problem with mentioning the Architect's company name in forum/social media for avoidance to anyone else.
 
They are trying to cover themselves against liability.

They have at least admitted that they made changes without your prior consent. You need to have this confirmed in writing by the way. Now you need to be able to demonstrate that they did not make you fully aware of the changes or why they happened.

You need to check through the architects terms of engagement and look for any clauses that you can use to your advantage or they may try to use against you.

At the end of the day though... You will still need to rectify the issues. The architect may be liable for the costs but they do not have to complete those works themselves... And to be honest, i wouldnt want them to...
 
They are talking nonsense. Ask them to confirm their position in writing. Keep a detailed record of everything from now on, including any conversations, any telephone calls not returned, any requests not responded to. Also ask them for a copy of their complaints procedure and PI Insurance company. Also keep a record of anything that adds to your cost from now on.
 
Thanks for your advice and support on the matter everyone.

We are stuck between a rock and hard place as you mention.

We need to move forward with the home and as much as we despise the acts of "bullying", lies and deception at Fridays meeting we have no choice but to get them to resubmit a planning application based on their Tender/Building reg drawings.

They the Architects KNOW they are in the WRONG but refused to implicate themselves for obvious reasons. For us to ditch them and start a fresh with a new Architect would put us back even further.

* Forgot to mention - we also had another of their preferred builders this week look over the plans and they have now written up an RFI to the architect, majority of what's being questioned is the major variations between PL & T drawings. This report was handed to the architect at yesterdays meeting.

We could know we could have them up for a number of Negilent cases but it will not solve the problem of getting the home completed in the short term.

What we will do though, IF the new planning application gets refused for any reason we will then report them to the ARB, RIBA and get the necessary wheels in motion against their PI ins.

One of the Directors is "in bed" with the cowboy builder for whom the Architect's firm recommend as can be proven, one of the other recommend builders from the Architect I have since found out is a relative... let alone the denial of fault re the plans as discussed previously.

If I have'nt already done so, this is a link to the cowboy builder story for which just tops everything off for us.

We do not have pots of money and are not in a position to spend thousands with a litigation Lawyer at this stage unfortunately.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?391068-Builder-has-ruined-our-lives.
 
The case against them would refer back to the RIBA handbook -

Your Architect undertakes to:

"only make material alteration to the services or the approved design with the clients prior approval."

and within the ARB's (for which they are members) Architects Code : Standards of Conduct and Competence, there are a number of failings on their part.
 
The case against them would refer back to the RIBA handbook -

Your Architect undertakes to:

"only make material alteration to the services or the approved design with the clients prior approval."

and within the ARB's (for which they are members) Architects Code : Standards of Conduct and Competence, there are a number of failings on their part.

exactly my point. You did not give prior approval. Indeed, they didn't even make clear and notify you of changes... they stealthed them in and "expected" you to find them.

I assume your discussions with your architect have been as per their formal complaints procedure? If this isn't the case then you need to instigate this in the first instance. You can tell them what your complaint is and what you want them to do to rectify it. Be clear about where you feel they fell short of their duties (which is pretty obvious) but use extracts from their own terms and conditions and the architects code of conduct to demonstrate where they have also fallen short in their professional conduct.

The ARB will usually only investigate and take action after you have gone through an architects complaints procedure and are still not happy (which I fear will be the case here). Additionally, they only investigate issues of failed professional conduct and serious incompetence (or, of course, where a professional is referring to themselves as an architect but is not registered with them)

You should be aware that the construction industry does have its own form of legal resolution which is overseen by people with experience in the industry and is usually dealt with outside of courts. This is called "Adjudication" as is described in Part II of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. This system is far cheaper, faster and more effective than any alternatives I know of and I would suggest that you look into it in a bit more detail.

(unfortunately my experience of it has normally been for non-paying clients but you are on the other side of the fence)
 

DIYnot Local

Staff member

If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.

Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.


Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local

 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top